and condemned in the after none folowyng, as is before declared. Whereupon they being committed to the shirifes, were conueyed to the place of the execution, where they suffered, the one that is Ihon Symson at Rochford, a bout MarginaliaIune. 10.the. x. of Iune, the other whych is Ihon Ardeley the same daye, but in an other place whiche was at Rayly.[Back to Top]
AT the examination of the say Symson & Ardely there were assembled so greate a multitude of people, that (the consistory not being able to hold them) they were fayne to stand in the church, nere about the sayd Consystory, waiting to se the prisoners when they should departe. Yt happened in the meane tyme that the byshop being set in heate with the stout and bold answers of the sayde two prisoners (especyally of Simson) burst out in his lowd and angry voyce and sayd, haue hym away: haue hym away. Now when the people in the church heard these wordes, and thinking (because the day was farre spent) that the prisoners had their iudgment, thei desirous to se the prisoners had to newgate, seuered them selues, one running one way, another another waye, which caused such a noyse in the church, þt they in the consistory wer al amased, & marueiled what it should meane: MarginaliaThe ridiculous fear of Bonner and his doctours.wherfore the byshoppe also being somewhat afrayde of thys sodein stur, asketh what ther was to do. The standers by answering sayd, that there was like to be some tumult. for they were together by the eares. When the byshop hard this, by & by his hart was in his heeles, and leauing his seate, he with the rest of that court betoke thē to their legges, hastening with all spede possible to recouer the doore that went into the byshops house: but the rest beinge somewhat lighter of foote then my Lord, dyd soner recouer the doare, and thronging hastely to gette in, kepte the byshop still out and cryed: saue my Lord, saue my Lord, but meaning yet first to saue them selues, if any daunger shoulde come, wherby they gaue the standers by good matter to laugh at: being in maner in that taking that the old stagers of Oxford were whē it was noysed that the church was on fyre, (wherof we made mention before) sauing that there the party then punished cast awaye hys fagot, and so escaping, was neuer hard of after: but here the poore soules beinge stopped of theyr iudgement a very small tyme, were immediatly after called vnto fire, & to fagot.[Back to Top]
Much of the material on Bradford's life and martyrdom first appeared in theRerum. This includes the material on Bradford's life before Mary's reign (Rerum, pp. 463-64), his saving of Gilbert Bourne's life and subsequent arrest (Rerum, pp. 464-65), Bradford's three examinations by Stephen Gardiner (Rerum, pp. 462-84), Bradford's 'private' disputations and his disputation with the Spanish friars (Rerum, pp. 484-502), Bradford's disputation with Pendleton (Rerum, pp. 499-501), Bradford's argument with Weston and his reasons against transubstantiation (Rerum, pp. 502 [recte 499]-499 [recte 500]). There was also a brief note on Bradford's execution which would be reprinted in every edition of the Acts and Monuments (Rerum, p. 501). All of this material came from Grindal. On 28 November 1557, Grindal wrote to Foxe sending him Bradford's examinations and certain other writings of the martyr along with the letter (BL, Harley 417, fo. 119r). In an earlier letter to Grindal, Foxe had acknowledged receipt of a 'historia Bradfordianum' along with various letters of the martyr (BL, Harley 417, fo. 113r).[Back to Top]
In the 1563 edition, Foxe added a mention of Bradford's objections to being made a deacon, a description of his preaching for three years in Edward VI's reign, a description of his imprisonment, a description of his character, lifestyle and appearance and Bradford's being taken to Newgate and then to the stake. Foxe also added an account of John Leaf (who was merely mentioned in the Rerum) and a new description of Bradford's behaviour at the stake, and an account of divine retribution on Woodruff, one of the sheriffs of London. Finally Foxe added an English poem lauding Bradford. All of this material came from individual informants, none from archival or print sources.[Back to Top]
The material on Bradford in the 1563 edition was badly out of order: Bradford's life, imprisonment and execution were followed, logically enough, by his letters to London, Cambridge, Lancashire, Walden and to a person, one 'B. C.'. But these letters were followed by his examinations, and then by more letters, more examinations. This was followed by the description of Leaf's martyrdom, Bradford's behaviour at his execution, and the poem praising him. In the 1570 edition, this material was brought into the classical order: life, imprisonment, examinations, execution and letters.[Back to Top]
Material was also added in the 1570 edition. Three examinations, taking place on 21 March, 28 March and 5 April, were added to this edition. They were reprinted from another version of Bradford's examinations which had been published in 1561 (All the examinacions of the martir J. Bradford [London, 1561], STC 3477, sigs. H5v-I1v, I5r-K5v. There are examinations in this 1561 volume which Foxe never printed: sigs. E5r-E7v). Foxe also added a talk Bradford had with a gentlewoman's servant and more information on Leaf in this edition. He also updated the account of the divine retribution inflicted on Woodroof, and he replaced the English poem praising Bradford with a Latin poem.[Back to Top]
The account of Bradford was unchanged in the 1576 and 1583 editions.
Much of the text in this section is concerned with the discussions between Bradford and various catholic interlocutors. Many of the glosses give prompts and cues to the ebb and flow of this debating, with a good deal of quiet and not-so-quiet moulding of readers' expectations and perceptions in Bradford's favour. There are several examples of a marginal gloss denouncing a catholic assertion as untrue on the strength of it being about to be objected to by Bradford (e.g. 'Boner agayne commeth in with an other vntruth'; 'An other vntruth in Winchester'). At one point when Winchester changes the subject, the gloss announces that he has lost his 'holde' ('Winchester leaueth his holde'; see also the gloss 'Winchester driuen to eate his owne wordes'). A syllogism in the margin assumes that which the catholic interrogator it is directed against sought to disprove ('Argument who so receaue the body of Christ do receiue the fruite and grace of lyfe: no wicked do receiue fruite and grace of lyfe. Ergo, no wicked men receiue the body of Christ'). In addtion to all this there are more direct attacks. The dubious legality of holding Bradford is often alluded to in the margin ('Bradford committed to the tower most vniustly'; 'M. Bradford imprisoned without a cause'; 'Bradford condemned without iust cause but as was gathered at his iudgement against him'; 'Bradford imprisoned for that, for which he had the lawes on his side'), and the point that is made in the case of other martyrs, that they have been imprisoned in order to generate evidence rather than on the strength of any evidence, is also used ('M. Bradford imprisoned not for matter they had, but for matter they would haue agaynst him'). Foxe emphasises anything embarrassing to the papists, producing yet another reference to Winchester's De Vera Obedientia ('Herodes oth quoth Winchester'; 'Winchest. De vera obedientia') and reporting Tunstal's admission about the relative novelty of the doctrine of transubstantiation ('Note how these Bishops themselues do graunt, that the time was, when transubstantiation was not defined by the Church. Tonstall sayth it was more then 800: yeares after Christ'). The catholic preference for acting in darkness is also gets mentioned ('Bradford kept in the Vestrey till darke night'; 'M. Bradford had from the Counter to Newgate by night'), as does Winchester's apparent preference of vows to men over those to God ('The preposterous iudgement of Winchester, to care so little for an othe to God, and so much for his vowe to the Pope'; 'Winchester stumbling at vowes made to mā and leaping ouer solemne othes made to God') which ties in with Foxe's general complaint against catholicism: that it fails to give due weight to the genuinely divine over the merely human. The standard characterisation of the exasperation of the papists in the face of resolved protestants is used three times: twice they are portrayed as 'in a chafe', and once as in a 'pelting chafe' ('The Frier in a chafe'; 'Wynchester in a chafe'; 'Wynchester in a pelting chafe'). An implicit marginal unmasking occurs in the description of Seton as 'flattering' and then as one who 'rayleth' soon after ('The flattering commendation of D. Seton to Mayster Bradford'; 'D. Seton rayleth agaynst M. Bradford').[Back to Top]
While in comparison to certain moments in the Oxford disputations Foxe's notes are on the whole less intrusive, the level of aggression in the glosses increases somewhat during Bradford's discussion with Harpsfield; this may be because they go through a more diverse agenda than is usually the case. Alternatively, the fact that they agree on quite a few points and have quite a civilised discussion for the most part may have encouraged Foxe to display more opposition in the glosses. Pendleton is ungenerously treated, for the straightforward reason that he was a turncoat ('Pendleton belike would study out the reasons that moued him to alter, for he had none ready to shew'). As for the contribution of the glosses to the portrayal of Bradford, his ongoing pastoral enthusiasm despite his imprisonment is noted ('Bradford preacheth and ministreth the Sacrament in prison'; 'Byshop Farrar confirmed in the truth, by Iohn Bradford'; see also the gloss 'Note well the Popes way to bring men to fayth', which bemoans the catholic use of imprisonment as a means of conversion), as is the affection shown to him by the people ('The reuerēt regard and affection of the people to M. Bradford'; 'The people in Cheapside bad Bradford farewell') and the tears of the prisoners at his departure ('The prisoners take their leaue of Bradford with teares'). The glosses set Bradford up as the charismatic pastor that his letters in the following section prove him to have been. He also enjoys the martyr's privilege of forseeing his own death ('Bradford dreameth of his burning, according as it came to passe') and is shown to be unworldly ('Bradford content with a little sleepe'). His tearfulness ('Bradfordes teares') and (especially) the mention of his name in connection with mortification ('Bolde confidēce and hope of Gods word and promise, semeth strange among them which are not exercised in mortification') should be read in part as preparatives for the joyfully self-condemnatory nature of the impending letters. There are several cross-references to other places in the book; 1570 has a correct reference to all three citations, 1576 to one, in all other cases, no specific reference is given. There is one example of a gloss badly placed after 1570 and an example of a scriptural reference wrong in 1563 (1. Cor. 12) but correct thereafter (1. Cor. 11).[Back to Top]
Bradford's leaving the employment of Sir John Harrington was not this simple. In his final examination of Bradford, Stephen Gardiner accused Bradford of having cheated Harrington out of ?140 and then becoming a 'gospeller'. Bradford indignantly and absolutely denied this accusation. Thomas Sampson, in a brief life of Bradford, which prefaced a 1574 edition of two of Bradford's sermons, wrote that Bradford, while in the service of Harrington, treasurer of Henry VIII's camp during the 1544 expedition to France, had taken money from the royal treasury without Harrington's knowledge. Later Bradford heard a sermon by Hugh Latimer, demanding the return of ill-gotten gains. This sermon seared Bradford's conscience and, following Latimer's counsel, he restored the money (Bradford [PS], I, pp. 32-33).[Back to Top]
Sampson's account is partially confirmed by the correspondence of Bradford with his friend John Traves, most of which was first published by Foxe in his 1583 edition. A letter written by Traves to Bradford, probably written about February 1548, contains Traves's advice to Bradford on restoring the money (BL, Harley 416, fos. 33r-34r, printed in Bradford [PS], I, pp. 1-4). In a letter written to Traves a few weeks later, Bradford stated that Latimer had advised him to write to Harrington, giving his former employer two weeks to make restitution. If Harrington refused, Bradford was to report the matter to the duke of Somerset and the privy council. A letter of 22 March 1548, from Bradford to Travers, describes Bradford's efforts to force a reluctant Harrington to return the money. A few weeks later Bradford wrote that Harrington had agreed to repay the money before 'Candlemas next coming' (2 February 1549) and that Latimer thought that this was sufficient. Apparently Harrington did not meet this deadline; in the autumn of 1549, Bradford wrote to Traves that Harrington had promised to make the payment on the following Candlemas. And in a letter to Traves written around February 1550, Bradford rejoiced that restitution had finally been made in full.[Back to Top]
From these letters, it would appear that Bradford was a party to some financial irregularity connected with Harrington's official duties on the French campaign in 1544. Years later, his conscience was stirred by Latimer, and following Latimer's advice, he forced Harrington to return the ill-gotten money.[Back to Top]
The finest quality wheat bread [OED].